STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
COUNTY OF PITT DISTRICT COURT DIVISION
FILE NO.: 13 CVD 398
HUNTER F. GRODNER, )
(now Hunter Summerlin) )
Plaintiff, ) VERIFIED MOTION
) FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
vs. )
) OR (IN ALTERNATIVE)
ANDRZEJ GRODNER, )
(now Andrew Grodner) ) MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
Defendant, )
________________________________)
NOW COMES the Defendant and pursuant to Rule 56 of the North Carolina Rules Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby prays for an Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment against Jeffrey L. Miller on the grounds that Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because there is no genuine issue as to any material fact as established by the verified Motion to Remove Opposing Counsel ("Motion to Remove") and other relevant documents attached as exhibits.
In the alternative, if this Court determines that there is controversy about any or all material facts regarding Motion to Remove then, pursuant to Rule 37(a) of the North Carolina Rules Rules of Civil Procedure the Defendant respectfully requests an Order to Compel Discovery against Jeffrey L. Miller so that he complies with the subpoena asking him to appear for a deposition.
In support of this Motion Defendant shows the Court the following:
- On 12 October 2018 Defendant filed Motion to Remove and in support of it he provided only two material facts sufficient to have his relief be granted (EXHIBIT.A):
- A quotation from a valid 13 December 2016 Order which is the law of the case stating that "Mr. Grodner is able to communicate directly with Mr. Miller via email only." (original emphasis);
- Statements by Jeffrey L. Miller refusing to communicate with Defendant via email and in fact threatening the Defendant with "law enforcement" if the Defendant continues to comply with the 13 December 2016 Order.
- In Motion to Remove the Defendant showed that the two aforementioned material facts lead to the conclusions of law that Jeffrey L. Miller has willfully violated, is currently violating, and plans to willfully violate North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 4.1. Truthfulness in Statements to Others which states that "in the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person."
- In Motion to Remove the Defendant showed that two aforementioned conclusions of law entitle him to an Order of this Court removing of Jeffrey L. Miller as opposing counsel in the case because his conduct prevents parties from communicating with each other and thus makes it impossible to abide by any court Order in the case.
- As of this date, in regards to Motion to Remove, Jeffrey L. Miller neither disputed any material facts, nor disputed any conclusions of law, nor opposed the relief which is to remove him as opposing counsel.
- Despite inconvertible facts in the Motion to Remove and lack of any response from Jeffrey L. Miller, Defendant sought additional discovery in the form of a deposition of Jeffrey L. Miller so that it gives Jeffrey L. Miller yet another opportunity to contradict, explain, and/or provide any relevant facts regarding the Motion to Remove. Therefore,
- On 15 October 2018 Defendant contacted Jeffrey L. Miller about the intent to depose him (EXHIBIT.B)
- On 18 October 2018, due to lack of any response from Jeffrey L. Miller, Defendant served Jeffrey L. Miller with Notice of Deposition and corresponding Subpoena, with deposition being scheduled for 1 November 2018 (EXHIBIT.C).
- On 26 October 2018 Jeffrey L. Miller filed Objection and Motion to Quash the Subpoena issued by the Defendant on 18 October 2018, where in part Jeffrey L. Miller stated (EXHIBIT.D):
- "(5) The subpoena is unreasonable, oppressive, and burdensome. It subjects the undersigned to the an undue burden and expense."
- "(6) The subpoena seeks to have the undersigned produce documents wholly unrelated to the current court proceedings and in violation of attorney-client privilege."
- "(7) The undersigned objects to the subpoena. He is entitled to an Order of this Court sustaining his objection and quashing the subpoena pursuant to Rule 45(c)(8)."
- The Objection and Motion to Quash sought by Jeffrey L. Miller seeks to deprive Jeffrey L. Miller of the discovery which could allow him to contradict, explain, and/or provide any relevant facts presented in the Motion to Remove. Jeffrey L. Miller did not propose and did not seek any other form of discovery.
- Therefore, because Jeffrey L. Miller has shown no intent to respond to any form of discovery, and in fact he does not see any need for any discovery which could allow him to contradict, explain, and/or provide any relevant facts regarding the Motion to Remove, Defendant accepts and asks this Court to accept Jeffrey L. Miller's actions as his definitive and final admission of facts presented in the Motion to Remove.
- Therefore, pursuant to Rule 56 of the North Carolina Rules Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant is entitled to Summary Judgement on his Motion to Remove and he attaches proposed Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (EXHIBIT.E).
- Should this Court determine that there are any facts in dispute regarding Motion to Remove, then pursuant to Rule 37(a) of the North Carolina Rules Rules of Civil Procedure Defendant respectfully requests an Order to Compel Discovery on Jeffrey L. Miller which would require him to honor the Subpoena to appear at a deposition.
WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for an Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment against Jeffrey L. Miller or in the alternative, an Order to Compel Discovery against Jeffrey L. Miller.
This is the .... day of ................... (month), ........................ (year)
____________________________
Andrzej Grodner, pro se
(currently Andrew Grodner)
P.O. Box 3571
Greenville, NC 27836
(252) 558 3040
email: agrodnercase@gmail.com
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
.... day of ................... (month), ........................ (year)
(Official Seal) ____________________________
Signature of Notary Public
____________________________
Printed Name of Notary Public
My commission expires: _________________
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Andrzej Grodner, Defendant in the cause, do hereby certify that the foregoing was served upon all parties via email delivery per ORDER TO WITHDRAW entered on December 13, 2016 and by depositing in a post office or official depository under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Postal Service a copy of the same in a postage prepaid envelope properly addressed to counsel of record of the parties as follows:
VIA EMAIL AND POSTAL MAIL
Mr. Jeffrey Miller, Esq.
Email address: jeff@millerandaudino.com
US Postal address: 2510 E. 10th Street
Greenville, NC 27858
This is the .... day of .................. (month), ................. (year)
____________________________
Andrzej Grodner, pro se
(currently Andrew Grodner)
P.O. Box 3571
Greenville, NC 27836
(252) 558 3040
email: agrodnercase@gmail.com
